The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a memorandum of points and authorities in support of their motion for summary judgment in a federal court challenge of California’s 10-day waiting period. The case is known as Curtin v. Bonta.
The memorandum was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. SAF is joined by the North County Shooting Center, San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, California Gun Rights Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, PWGG, L.P., and five private citizens. They are represented by attorneys Bradley A. Benbrook and Stephen M. Duvernay at the Benbrook Law Group in Sacramento.
“This fundamental issue in this case is crystal clear,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “California denies access to the fundamental right to keep and bear arms by the imposition of its waiting period law, which requires law-abiding individuals to wait at least ten days before they can take possession of a firearm, even when the state can confirm, often within minutes, they are eligible to acquire firearms. This makes no sense at all, especially in cases where the gun buyer already owns other firearms.”
“At the time of the founding, when the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights,” noted SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, “there was no such thing as a waiting period, anywhere in the country. The first time a waiting period was enacted in any jurisdiction was not until 1923, long after the relevant time period considered by the Supreme Court in the 2022 Bruen ruling, which struck down a law passed in New York, in 1911.”
Second Amendment Foundation
The Second Amendment Foundation (saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 720,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
A Right delayed is a Right Denied.
Not just the Right to Arms,
But the right to defend life itself!
True story. A friend who had his Springfield 9mm diligently listed on his San Bernardino County CCW wore the same in to a large regional sporting goods store. He examined the exact same gun, save serial number, said ‘I’ll take it” and filled out his 4473. The gun then went to the back room to sit for 10 days before my friend could pick it up. Now, would some graduate of a California law school please explain to me the strict scrutiny logic involved in infringing on my friend’s right to purchase and carry his new gun? I would love… Read more »
So, a woman buys a gun for protection from an ex. Commiefornia makes her wait 10 days to pick it up. In that 10-day interim her ex murders her with a baseball bat (’cause the Red Flag Law already took-away his guns, preventing him from murdering her… NOT!). Can her family sue the state because they, after all, prevented her from being able to defend herself?
CA has had this 10 day waiting period since 1966 that I know of. I was leaving for Vietnam in 3 days and went in to buy something to carry instead of the Navy’s smoothbore .38SPL. I was told I could pick it up in 10 days. The only way around that was for LE. Luckily, my father in law was CHP and got the gun for me. I will pass that Browning HI-Power down to my sons when I leave this planet.